All right, so hi everyone, my name is Timothy Gelsner, I'm part of the Indiosters of
hosting provider and also lashoot.com and today I want to introduce you lashoot.com and
this kind of hybrid models that we are pushing for rather with a public Cooperative and
common model. So today, across Europe, like institutions are seeking for
credible sovereign and opponent alternatives to proprietary plot
platforms. And we believe that this model can be a blueprint for the future
repented digital commands. So let's start with the basics. We're at first
them. It's also about the pencils for sure. And why do we choose
the pencils? So we choose the pencils for let's get them the lock-in for transparency.
And we usually adopt the pencils to escape this dependency, but yet we often
remain dependent on the economic actor behind it. And what we actually mean by
sovereignty is not to it's rarely made explicit. So as I said, open source
removes technical lock-in, but often leaves it for a particular dependency. It
gives you legal freedom, but not necessarily the decision power. So actually
open source is not really about sovereignty.
sovereignty is about who is funding it and the funding will shape all the
priorities against the products. And so before everything else, it's always a
survival of the actor with maintaining and developing the infrastructure
on the the open source software. And most of those open source software
depend on the single economic actor. That was a really mentioning. And when
the survival depends on growth and revenue concentration, governance will always
comes after. So I'm actually not here, but to make a trial on private
entities. It's only about intentions and incentives.
So sovereignty is actually about trade-offs. It's about decisions and decisions
that are unavailable and a very diverse way. It's about when the system is
under stress, who has the product decided. And we have seen this in all the
products. We have to take decisions, we write prices, we do support. Should we
change licenses or slow development? Should we take more capitals, accept
limits, develop more features or concentrate on considering dating the
core of the product, accept more configuration, which kind of
contribution are we accepting. And we think this more and more with this
open core models. And usually open source is used to enter or market and then
capturing the values by closing it. And how we can take decisions in this
strategy. So actually licenses don't decide. It's a governance that does
and decisions will define rights, but governance defines who decides when
right conflicts with constraints. And so where it is actually the poverty
decide, especially when choices are hard and infrastructure under stress.
And we are seeing this a lot actually at the moment. We all know the
political situation. And we are seeing like hard decision and we are
really dependency on this infrastructure that are US based or
properties. So as I was saying, Europe, Europe, Europe in
institutions are seeking for credible solution for sovereignty and
open alternatives. And I want to introduce you one initiative that was
done in France, called Lasvites, which I think is a really bold step in that
direction. And it's something quite news that is really shaping a new
landscape. And it's a very unique new way to do things. So a public
institution decided to develop a heightened open source software. With this
ambition to demonstrate that we can maintain commands with a public
institution for the public good and the public interest. And there's
also other initiatives in Europe happening. So, for instance, in Germany,
there is an open-desk initiative, which is a bit different. It's a more
traditional path that decided to partnership with more established
sources of software editors, which is also an interesting path. But really
with Lasvites, we are seeing this major shift with this public
entity, developing a bunch of software by themselves. And so Lasvites is
not a procurement. So this matters, but what really matters is that
commands need an ecosystem. With that an ecosystem, commands will be
fragmented, captured, or even disappeared. So we have Lasvites, OK, we have
this public interest by design. It's reusable beyond the state. And it's a
relatively upstream. But yeah, we need this ecosystem of different
actors to provide support, to provide hosting, to provide adoption,
training, and a long-term maintenance. So interlaces.com. And that's where
we want to jump in with our model of multi-stake holders
cooperative. We are users, workers, public and private actors are
actually corners of the entity. So this is really how users can
begin to control the direct justice access, but we are
controlling the governance on the decisions.
So the root of the Lasvite.com is the different service providers that
are committed to open and democratic digital infrastructure. It's
actually a various cooperative that are getting together to provide a
shared infrastructure, to share responsibility and share
roadmap, and to provide service together. So it's a virtualization of
our competition. So you have India itself, which has a
empire of. So we are historically hosting provider. So we manage the
hosting part. Yard.com, which is a developer cooperative. So they
can work on developing integration, debugging, and improving the
software. So I'm contributing to the commands. I have the
Bureau.com, which we provide the domain names. I'll go which work on
the email offer in our service. And also open source
politics, which work more on the project management, training,
and helping people to add up the software and to use it the
right way. So it's about building a command bay, the
ecosystem, it's about interoperability, interoperability,
in that exclusivity. So it's how we work in synergy with
multiple stakeholders, so public institutions with last
feet, but also private actors that want to provide the service
or run this. So it's about subordinating the economic
activity to the collective governance. There's no venture
capital, no enclosure. It's a real share layer of collaboration
without capture. And here the power is really distributed by
design. There's no single actor, because that can decide by
itself. And the core, in some ways, becomes more an
consistent system fewer than a gatekeeper. So
concretely, what do we offer? So we offer various services
that are based on last feet tools. So last feet is a kind of
digital workspace. You have software to take notes
collaboratively. So called docs. You have grists, which is
an occurred database. You have drives to share files. You have
the chat service with metrics and elements. You have the
video conferences with meet and you have also a mail
offer. So this is the core of the offer that we want to provide
and that we work to contribute with last feet, let's
you go up. And we also provide more like add on services that
we can add also. But the main core of our
offer is to focus on this collaborative tools. And so this is
not a potential economy. We want to set up the business model
on a virtual cycle for the commands. And the idea is to give
back a share of our income to the community and to the
commands. So they are maintained in the long term. And yeah,
it really is the idea is to fund the command and all its
supply chain, not only your part. And to really contribute
to it and to have this broad offer with various service
providers, which one who have their own expertise. And that
can provide a common service. So why does this match are
beyond fronts? We think this can be a blueprint, which also
countries or initiatives can get inspired by. So it's a
replicable model. It can go beyond the speed of having
resources. It can be done in many countries. If this kind of
cooperative is quite specific in France, it's multi-stakeholder
schema. And what we are seeing here is that last
feet shows how a public actor can add it to digital
command. And we've last feet.com, we show how an ecosystem
can operate and sustain it and make synergies together. But
maybe I think there's a kind of a still missing layer in this
broader place where we can coordinate, protect and fund the
commands, be on a single country or on a single ecosystem.
And maybe this can be done with this new initiative that is
coming in, that has been set up in Europe. So the European
Digital Infrastructure Consortium, Edick. And this provides
this new layer with a broader spectrum with different countries
collaborating together. So there's Germany, France,
and the Netherlands, I think, also on different countries that are
applying to join. And then there you have this institutionalized
bodies that can really work on protecting the
commands and to provide a robust infrastructure.
We can see some red flags also, see, because we're
talking about the institutes. It's a very political
game here. And I think we have contributors to this
ecosystem. We need to make our voice heard and read work
together. So we can have this place for real collaboration and
to have these credible solutions together.
OK. So let's take a quick break here. We've seen this
kind of three layered synergies that I wanted to introduce with
this public entity, Editing Commons. And ecosystem of factors
that want to sustain it and provide it to the broader
public. And a bigger, bigger entity, that one is that
could protect fund and drive this because it was
also convinced. So we are on this track about public
digital infrastructure for Europe. And I think I want to
conclude this presentation on one main message.
So open source is actually not an end.
The commands are not an end. They are only methods.
They are ways to shock or enable reviews, reduce technical
locking, share resources, organize governance, distribute
power, but it's not an end by itself. Open source
matters because of what it enables, not because of the
license itself. And commands are about how decisions are
made and not just how resources are shared. And what we
have to ask ourselves is really what the goal that we want to
set together. And I think this goal is about how we have
shared capacity to decide overall digital infrastructure.
And as I mentioned, it's really obvious now.
It's something that most open source advocates and
command of advocates have been raising the alarm for a while.
But we are seeing with Trump some hard choice that are
decisions that showed how dependent we are from those
infrastructure. Like for instance, with the international
court, a criminal court that has been cut off of
Microsoft services and judges that have been cut off of
the visa protocol. And we've seen that they can really
unplug us. And this is quite dramatic. So we need to
organize. If it's not really too late in some ways. But
so we need to work together using those tools, open
source and commands and shared governance to build
these features that we want. And really, like if
sovereignty is something that matters, governance really
matters more than licenses. So that's the direction
that we're trying to build with lsp.co. And we think this
is only the beginning. So it's not silver bullet. It's just a
direction that we think it's worth building together. It's a
different path for digital sovereignty, to going from
public software to share digital infrastructure and to
come on the base ecosystem. And I really invite you to
contribute to this and use this. This really has a blueprint for
your own initiatives and to work together. So we can build
this robust infrastructure. So actually, I went pretty fast.
I'm really on an environmental time. But let's give
us a lot of room for questions. So thank you. And if you
want to see what we're doing, let's do this website
tutorial. And if you have questions, I'm here to
answer.
Thank you for the presentation and the highlighting of
the system. I'm just wondering, you know, this is pretty much an
operation model if you're just right. But what I'm going to have
you want to be back to the dual features project, which we're
operating in the list in the like an art, who
is trying to come to use in the right money.
Yeah. So the questions about how much do we really
contribute back to the open source model, the open source
software that we use. So actually what I didn't really mention is that
this project is being built. It will be officially, like
the legal entity will be officially launched the first of
years. But in our business model, we defined a share that
will be, that will go back to the software. So obviously,
we need also to be sustainable ourselves. So it will be
probably gradual. But we hope to at least give something like 10
percent of the revenue back to the community. So easier by
contributing ourselves with our own resources. So contributing
to the card and helping you predict it. But also to
giving back to the project. And that's where I think it's important that
we have another kind of foundation like entity, not for
profit, where we which can shape this kind of funding and
where everyone like us can put a bit of money there. And
I think it's it's it's it's it's more sense if it's not for
profit. So we can have this common goal together and not just
nourishing an entity that is or that usually is capturing
some of the other values or has the other decision
power. And that's why I wanted also to introduce the
saidy thing, which could be it. I don't know,
honestly, it's really some, I hide political games on
this. So we'll see, but we have to act so we can make it
happen.
So the question is, is there a municipality,
connectivity is a region that are using those solutions.
So last week is deployed already. And there's a
southern of agents, public agents using it. And there's
actually a last week with Vladimir, which is a digital entity
that managed the digital agency agency for the state.
That is deployed so for public agents and you also have
entity, which is deploying this feed for small
collectivities. So all collectivities that are under
three thousand inhabitants, I think, can use last
week on are using last week. And for instance, one of
the tools that is really really used is
and likely is a French state. Also, maybe you've seen it
a bit following this famous diverse talk of our
great president. They say that they are moving out of
teams, and they want all public agent to use
their video conference solution. So it's being
deployed.
Yeah, they're talking about last week. And as
as last week.com, we want to like bridge the gap. So
there's a public agent, small collectivities that can
use last week. And as we want to provide to the
providers to the others. So private actors, the
families, cooperatives, but also to authors, public
entities that are not in the scope. So bigger
security or collectivities.
We want to hold this.
Is this platform international?
I mean, it's a foreign sub-elect.
So yeah, the question is, is this platform
international? So it's mostly in France,
that there's collaboration with the countries like
Zones, and also, we've been with Germany.
So some part of the presentation, there's a
There is some integration, I think it protects with dogs,
for instance, if I'm right.
But this is a, it's a no big shift to be international.
And that's also what is the ADIC is about.
Is that, is that, is that, is that not the link that can be translated
in the Netherlands?
Yeah, yeah, I think it's already done.
There's already translations for all those tools.
And you can contribute to it.
I think it actually ducks made the call for this.
So if you're language is not there, you can contribute.
Over there, back to the back.
Did I ask them, right?
And how are you actually,
if you're not going to know what to do,
so how does it look?
So yeah.
So the question is about how we do,
we, we colorate it goes up providers,
like next cloud, for instance.
So actually last week is built on,
open source blocks.
So for instance, ducks is built on,
so there's collaboration with the block.
So there's a developer.
And so somehow there's a JSON collaboration on the scope of the tools of those tools.
We've next cloud, it's actually a different solution.
So next cloud could integrate some solutions of less feed,
like ducks, or the collaborative editing.
But it's a, it's a, it's actually another model.
That's what I was talking about with the open desk,
which is part of, which is part of,
so this is a bit of different path,
but I think they can be overlap,
and that's where we need to be smart.
But yeah, and the goal is definitely to work with the leaders,
the collaborative grid, for instance,
which is, which is a grid slab is the editor,
and then with matrix also.
And last week, Tim had some developers
that are paid to work on contributing to those tools.
So, okay.
Okay.
So the question is, what did value of last feed of our open desk,
and what's the last feed, like what's the added value of last feed,
and where's the overlap?
Okay.
So the question is, what did value of last feed of our open desk,
and what's all up?
So first, I want to say I'm from last feed.com,
I'm not from last feed, so this is my point of view.
And actually, there's the next talk about last feed,
and from the public,
the person that is part of the new,
so we can also answer this question.
But my point of view, as I said,
this is like a really game changer,
when the public entity is editing.
It's not to private actor.
I like next plot, I like those videos,
but I think they still capture in some ways
of the decision, and it's hard as a sometimes
as a service provider to contribute back,
as a like this commercial agreement to get,
they are making decisions that I'm always,
I don't always agree.
And so I think here, we can read this landscape,
with a broader kind of entities,
public private,
and it leaves room to this ecosystem,
where everyone can contribute,
and to another say in the decisions.
And actually last feed is not there yet,
it's something that I think they want,
and that's something that we want to let you go up,
and we want to demonstrate this people in the public,
in the private sector,
that want to play this game,
and that it should go away,
like it should escape them in some ways,
and that we create this space for collaboration.
But for me, it's really this kind of,
when you're in this private sector,
like you're on survival,
we'll always be the driver for the decisions.
And that thing, I think, is a risk for digital comments,
some comments on general.
So from it, this is the main difference,
we've opened this, unless it.
This opens this one.
It's here, different philosophy,
and different governance model.
Thank you.
The last one.
Yeah.
So on this one,
maybe spend it's effort,
or like, how much effort we spend,
easing the migration away from others,
on the speed of the course.
Okay.
So the question is about migration,
how do we, what do we do to ease the migration
from other solutions and property solutions,
so this is actually something
that we are working on planning to work on.
It's not quite empty yet,
but that's definitely a contribution,
as a little bit of clubs that we want to do,
and to provide like tools for,
sorry.
Yeah.
And actually, I can,
when I can give you some of our,
for our engineers,
so we've lasted up,
we're planning to do fundraising,
to actually have the means,
to provide this kind of services and tools,
and to really contribute back,
like we need to have more financial,
financial, financial progress,
so in your stirs,
on the speed of up,
we are quite small at the moment,
but we really want to,
we have more people in our governance,
and more funds to do this kind of things,
and yet to work on the users,
on the transition,
and actually what is that with this tool,
is,
there's the adoption.
Like when you have to change all view,
you are a bit,
it's not about only technical migration,
it's also about,
how we,
we work on with trained people,
to,
to use those tools,
that can be a bit different,
and yeah,
you're always this,
resistance to change,
and that need to be managed,
and that's,
what we want to do,
if you like it.com.
I think you really wanted to ask your questions,
so maybe you can go for this one.
I want you to understand,
the time is over.
Sorry,
okay,
we can talk,
okay,
thank you.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.